The title of Unfrozen: The Fight for the Future of the Arctic initially made me wary. In recent years, the Arctic has too often been framed through dramatic and simplified narratives of great power competition, looming conflict, and a rapidly opening frontier. As someone who spends much of my time working to nuance these portrayals, I approached the book with some hesitation, though buoyed by my knowledge of and respect for the authors. I was not disappointed. Mia Bennett and Klaus Dodds offer something rich, layered, and compelling in this monograph. Unfrozen is a deeply contextualized analysis of Arctic transformation that resists reduction to a single storyline. Yet this very strength also raises important questions about how we interpret and act upon its insights.
One of the book’s most notable contributions is its insistence on situating contemporary Arctic dynamics within longer environmental, social, and political trajectories. The authors foreground environmental change, not simply as a backdrop to geopolitical competition, but as a central force reshaping the region. Equally significant is the sustained attention to Arctic Indigenous Peoples, whose presence is not treated as peripheral or symbolic, but as foundational to the past, present, and future. Their leadership, agency, and evolving political roles are woven throughout the book, including in the identification of Indigenous autonomy as a geopolitical driver. In doing so, the book moves beyond accounts that isolate geopolitics as a standalone domain, embedding it within a broader and more relational understanding of Arctic change.
This approach is reflected in the book’s structure. Geopolitics, despite its inference in the subtitle, does not fully emerge until the latter half of the text. Readers are first grounded in the environmental transformations and human dimensions of the region before being introduced to geopolitical tensions and “flashpoints.” The sequencing encourages readers to see geopolitics not as the defining feature of the Arctic, but as one element within a more complex and historically rooted system. It also raises a question of audience reception: in an era when many readers are drawn to the Arctic through precisely the kinds of geopolitical narratives the title evokes, I worry that many readers will not stay with the book long enough to appreciate this more nuanced account.
Where the book is particularly powerful is in its diagnosis of a region in transition. The authors capture both the depth of cooperation that characterized the post-Cold War Arctic and the extent to which that period has been disrupted. Their argument that “those 30 years of deepening cooperation are no more” (p. xviii) reflects the gravity of current geopolitical tensions. Yet here, the analysis also invites further interrogation. If, as the authors demonstrate, Arctic governance has always evolved in response to shifting environmental and political conditions, the present moment may not signal the end of cooperation, but augur its reconfiguration. Just as post-Cold War cooperation did not eliminate great power competition, renewed competition may not eliminate cooperation.
The book provides glimpses of this possibility. References to emerging forms of collaboration, referred to as “a la carte” diplomacy (p. 185), and the continued functioning of certain cooperative mechanisms suggest a more dynamic institutional landscape than a simple narrative of breakdown might imply. From a governance perspective, these developments are not merely residual; they are indicative of adaptability. They point to an Arctic governance system that, while under strain, continues to evolve in response to changing conditions, a dynamic consistent with scholarship emphasizing the persistence of cooperation even amid deep geopolitical fracture.
It is here that the book opens the door to a set of questions that warrant further exploration. What do these transformations mean for the design and support of Arctic institutions? How might existing governance frameworks adapt to better manage the interplay of environmental change, geopolitical competition, and technological development? How can the identification of emerging “flashpoints” inform efforts to anticipate and mitigate risk? Rather than viewing flashpoints solely as sites of potential conflict, they may serve as focal points for institutional innovation, where new forms of cooperation and coordination can be tested. These questions are particularly salient for core institutions such as the Arctic Council, which is now widely understood to be operating under significant constraint yet remains difficult to replace, raising pressing questions about how it can be sustained and incrementally adapted under current conditions.
These questions are also particularly salient when considering the role of nonstate and substate actors, including Indigenous organizations, which the book rightly highlights as increasingly influential. In periods of geopolitical tension, these actors often sustain lines of communication and maintain relationships that formal diplomatic channels cannot. Their continued engagement underscores the importance of viewing Arctic governance not as a set of discrete institutions, but as an interconnected ecosystem of actors, norms, and practices. Within this ecosystem, cooperation may become more fragmented, issue-specific, and pragmatic, but it is no less important.
The book’s attention to narrative is also significant. As the authors note, conceptions of the Arctic are themselves socially constructed and subject to change. This insight has important implications for how the region is governed. Narratives that emphasize conflict and competition can constrain policy choices and limit the perceived space for cooperation. Conversely, more nuanced narratives, such as the one Bennett and Dodds provide, can help create conditions for constructive engagement. The challenge is not only to analyze the Arctic as it is, but to consider how different narratives might shape what emerges.
In its final pages, the book underscores the role of human agency: “Our actions will determine whether the future will be frozen or unfrozen” (p. 274). This is a fitting conclusion to a work that consistently highlights both continuity and change. It also points to an opportunity. By illuminating the complex and interconnected forces shaping the Arctic, Unfrozen provides a valuable foundation for thinking not only about what is happening in the region, but about what could come next. For scholars and practitioners alike, the task is to build on this analysis to support governance approaches that are adaptive, resilient, and capable of sustaining cooperation in an increasingly uncertain environment.
